The welfare impacts of carbon taxes and labels on food demand
炭素税と食品ラベリングの福祉効果 (AI 翻訳)
Marco Tomasi, Michela Faccioli, Carlo Fezzi, Ian J. Bateman
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
炭素税と炭素ラベリングが食品需要に与える影響を、英国のオンラインスーパー実験データを用いて分析。炭素ラベリングで炭素含有量5.6%減、60ポンド/tCO2eの炭素税で9.89%減だが、年間一人当たり78.71ポンドの厚生損失。両者を組み合わせると、より低い税率で同程度の削減が可能。政策の補完性を示す。
English
Using a randomized online supermarket experiment in the UK, this paper analyzes the welfare impacts of carbon taxes and carbon labels on food demand. Carbon labels reduce the carbon footprint of the average food basket by 5.60%, while a £60/tCO2e tax on high-carbon products yields a 9.89% reduction but a welfare loss of £78.71 per person per year. Combining both policies achieves similar emission reductions with a lower tax rate (£27.86) and reduced welfare loss (£33.52), showing complementarity.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
英国の食品需要を対象とした実験だが、日本の食料消費や家庭からの排出削減政策（食品ロス削減、環境ラベル普及など）にも示唆を与える。特に炭素税とラベリングの組み合わせ効果は、日本のカーボンプライシング政策設計に参考になる。
In the global GX context
This paper provides rigorous empirical evidence on the effectiveness of carbon taxation and labelling on food consumption, relevant for global climate policy. The finding that combining policies reduces welfare costs is important for designing equitable carbon pricing mechanisms, especially for sectors like food where distributional impacts are significant.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:The structural demand model with censoring and the experimental design offer a robust methodology for estimating welfare effects of carbon policies on consumption.
🏢実務担当者:Policymakers and retailers can use these results to design combined carbon tax and labelling schemes that minimize consumer welfare loss while achieving emissions reductions.
🏛政策担当者:The complementarity of carbon taxes and labels suggests that a mixed policy approach can reduce the required tax rate and welfare loss, important for political feasibility.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Food production and consumption account for a third of global greenhouse gas emissions (Crippa et al., 2021) and, therefore, offer a large mitigation potential. Policies such as carbon taxation and carbon labelling can contribute to correcting such externalities by encouraging consumers to substitute away from carbon intensive food products. We employ data from a survey-based, randomized experiment simulating an online supermarket, administered to a representative sample of the UK population. Using a structural demand system based on the Exact Affine Stone Index model with censoring, we estimate the greenhouse gas emission reductions and welfare effects associated with a range of demand-side policy scenarios, combining carbon labelling and carbon taxation. Our results show that the application of carbon labels leads to a 5.60% decrease in the carbon content of the average food basket. A £60 tax per tonne of CO 2 e on the most carbon intensive products would yield a 9.89% reduction in the carbon footprint, while also decreasing consumer welfare by £78.71 per person per year. Respectively, these policies would yield a decrease in emissions corresponding to about 2.7% and 4.7% of the GHG emissions of the UK. Combining carbon taxation and carbon labelling allows to reach the same CO 2 e emissions reduction as the carbon tax, with only a £27.86 tax rate per tonne of CO 2 e, thereby reducing welfare losses to £33.52 per person per year. These findings imply that carbon taxation and carbon labelling can be complementary policies to abate greenhouse gas emissions, while limiting the negative impacts on welfare.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2026.103387first seen 2026-07-17 04:44:53
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。